Those of you who follow me on Twitter may have woken up on Sunday morning to something of a Twitter storm. I had, you see, come across this Post article on the fare hike in which a copy editor writing the headline called the subways “atrocious” (which has since been changed to “woeful”) and the intrepid reporter noted that service is “worse than ever.” Acknowledging that there are clear warning signs and less-than-reliable service these days, I wasn’t impressed by this article.
Today’s problems — as anyone who has lived in New York for longer than the five years the 20-something author from Newburgh, NY, has knows — is not nearly close to being “worse than ever.” Hop back in time to the late 1980s and early 1990s when train breakdowns were common and doors wouldn’t open. Jump back to the early 1980s and late 1970s when muggings were commonplace and track fires frequent. Jump back to the mid-1970s when the MTA briefly pondered cutting the L train entirely due to a cratering ridership and backlog of maintenance. That was literally worse than ever.
Perhaps it was unfair of me to come down so hard on a reporter for The Post. After all, it’s The Post, and I should expect nothing better. (It also led to a fantastically sarcastic reply from Joseph Cutrufo.) But the underlying problem with Gabrielle Grilli’s was just how wrong it was around the edges. She claimed that recent fares hike cover “only the raises of MTA employees” and warned that the MTA is going to cancel the Second Ave. Subway without explaining how that threat affects only future, unfunded portions and not the one currently under construction. It also has nothing to do with the fare hikes and everything to do with Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s lack of support for the MTA’s capital plan.
The overall issue with articles such as this one is that they are how the public gets its information. I have a dedicated but small readership, and The Post and The Times and The Daily News all reach more eyeballs than I do by an extremely high number. To see this type of coverage in our newspapers is discouraging, especially when these papers are supposed to serve as a conduit between the public and its politicians.
Grilli clearly tried to write something else. Her story wasn’t based entirely in fiction as a late-night release from the Straphangers showcased how certain elements of subway service are trending downward in recent years. Here’s what Gene Russianoff had to say:
This is the fifth subway, bus and commuter fare increase in eight years in the New York City area, leaving riders weary and angry. More hikes are planned. At the same time, service is suffering. Delays are on the rise throughout the system and crowding is at record levels.
The MTA also has a $15 billion gap for rebuilding transit over the next five years. If this shortfall stands, New Yorkers will likely lose many improvements for better service. This could range from fewer new subway cars and buses to the slow installation of countdown clocks alerting riders of train arrivals. It also could mean borrowing billions for these improvements, which would create more pressure on fares.
What riders desperately need are state leaders who will be powerful champions for funding decent transit. First and foremost, there’s Governor Andrew Cuomo, who appoints the MTA’s Board of Directors. Governor Cuomo should forcefully make the case for new transit funding. He can tell New Yorkers that the MTA fuels the State’s economy, conserves the State’s energy and promotes its environment. He should also press for progressive transit funding, like MoveNY’s fair tolling plan.
And here’s what he shouldn’t do: On one day, call the MTA’s capital budget “bloated” and on others use the system as a personal photo op. And on yet other days, raid hundreds of millions from dedicated transit taxes and use them for non-transit purposes. Cuomo’s leadership is key to winning a robust capital program. But the possible loss of critical rebuilding projects is a reminder of a painful truism: Never leave the subways without funding.
The MTA’s own board materials published in advance of Monday’s committee meetings lay bare this reality. Terminal delays on both weekends and weekdays jumped by around a third over the past year; trains aren’t arriving as regularly as they should; on-time performance is declining; and as rolling stock ages — even newer cars are reaching their teenage years — breakdowns increase slightly. All in all, things aren’t nearly as bad as they were or could be, but the system needs to be maintained, with money and attention and support, to avoid a future that repeats the past.
In something of a Catch-22, one of the reasons for these performance issues can be traced to recent record-high ridership with daily fares pushing past 6 million on a regular basis. The system simply isn’t currently built to withstand this many people. In essence, the subways are so popular that they are breaking down under the strain of too many people. For years, advocates have warned of the need to build for the future either through technological initiatives that can increase capacity on preexisting subway lines or through system expansion projects. Neither of these are far enough along to solve today’s problems, and it’s questionable if they can solve tomorrow’s problems before it’s too late.
It’s true, as the Straphangers and Riders Alliance have both pointed out lately, that Cuomo needs to step forward and be responsible. But we shouldn’t have this conversation without a look at the institutional flaws at the MTA. The agency is asking for $30 billion, and perhaps it’s bloated though not as Cuomo expects. His AirTrain proposal is more bloated than useful. Do they need this much? And why does everything cost so much and take so long? The MTA’s construction projects are more expensive and time-consuming than any other international transit agency’s work. They can’t automate lines or build new ones. They can’t even bring escalators, elevators and vent fans online in a timely fashion. Something needs reform just as something — the MTA and its subway system — needs proper political support.
Ultimately, contractor corruption and work efficiencies aren’t sexy. It’s easier for Gabrielle Grilli to highlight today’s service problems because she doesn’t know better just as it’s easy for people to bemoan the long lost W train or fetishize 1980s graffiti because they don’t know better. People who do know better though should come through with what’s needed: support, money and a real eye for reform. New York’s present and future depend on it.
56 comments
Whether it’s news or sports, the Post (and the Daily News) make a living over being manic/depressive in their reporting — every success is the Greatest Achievement in the History of New York; every problem is the Worst Disaster in the City’s History. You almost wish they could take the Grand Central shuttle one week and just do a retro-1970s exhibition for them public, with the graffitied-over exterior and interiors, broken doors, broken AC, broken PAs, and maybe a surprise track fire between Fifth and Sixth Avenue complete with train evacuation (followed by an MTA crew coming in and ‘fixing’ the problem by repainting the cars silver and blue. Several times.).
Maybe if they had a real-life experience with the 1970s and early 80s, it world make both the hyperbolic tabloid writers and those nostalgic for the ‘edgier’ days of 40 years ago shut their mouths or put away their keypads.
And sell no newspapers. So that’s out.
The price of milk has gone up in each of the past ten years since 2005, but has milk service gone up?
You can live without things like milk and pizza. Many believe it is better to be dairy free. But many have no other choice than the subways and buses.
I’ve noticed similar trends in kale prices, BrooklynBus, and I still can’t easily take my kale from 125th and 2nd to Wall & Water. What are the kale barons doing with all the extra money they’re demanding?!
Also, I forgot to mention that milk service has gotten better. We now have low fat and fat free milk as well as soy milk, almond milk, coconut milk and even cashew milk. None of those existed when the fare was 15 cents when your only milk choices were homogenized and non homogenized. However our subway and elevated system has shrunken since then, not expanded like milk choices.
Sure, bring in Uber-Milk & Lyft-Milk… they cost twice as much as the standard option.
Each one of those “milk” industries is completely different. Soy milk producers and almond producers and the guy with 100 acres for his cows in Columbia County. are not anywhere near the same. This sounds like NY Post type writing.
The point isn’t even about milk. It’s about options. You don’t have to drink milk although there are now more varieties now than ever before. But most have no option but the subway or bus.
Just like you don’t have to use milk you don’t have to use the bus or the train. Telecommute, catalog shop…
Live in your own little world, completely out of touch with reality…
No one is forcing people to use the buses or subway.
No one is forcing you to be out of touch with reality. Even if some jobs can be done at home, others can’t. Students cannot earn high school diplomas from home. I could go on, but it’s really not necessary.
I walked to high school and even today, most students at that high school walk. No one is forcing anyone to use the subway or the bus.
News flash: Not everyone attends a nearby school.
News flash: You’re isolating one school and probably have no way to gauge your claim accurately without looking like a stalker.
Fares are going up because wages and benefits for unionized MTA workers are going up.
Then again other people’s wages go up, and other prices go up, and maybe even the minimum wage will go up.
The question is whom is getting ahead of whom? And the answer is that mostly because of pension increases passed in 1995 and 2000 but being paid for now, and unlimited health benefits, unionized public employees have gotten richer relative to private sector workers, other than perhaps the richest (and since 2008 not even them).
https://larrylittlefield.wordpress.com/2014/07/01/the-executivefinancial-class-the-politicalunion-class-and-the-serfs/
Since unionized public employees keep getting richer relative to the rest of us, we can afford fewer of them (particularly since we’re carrying more and more retirees). The question is, does higher productivity make up that difference, or do we get maintenance and service cuts or fare increase in excess of inflation?
Walking, biking, roller blading, taxis, hitchhiking..
“It also has nothing to do with the fare hikes and everything to do with Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s lack of support for the MTA’s capital plan.”
Actually, Cuomo put more state dollars into the MTA capital plan than any Governor since…Cuomo. And DeBlasio has put in nothing.
The issue is generational equity. Generation Greed robbed the future for 25 years, and now it is the future.
Why don’t you hear it in the newspaper and on TV? Who watches network TV and reads the dead trees anymore? Do you really thing those senior readers, watchers and voters want to be told that this is part of the cost of their party coming do? Or course not. They want rationalizations.
You should know better. The MTA has more dedicated tax revenues than all the other transit systems in the country put together. So why can’t it maintain and expand the system? Because the money is being sucked into the past. Say so.
The city definitely needs to put in more, especially to subsidize the MTA for what they are spending to provide extra school bus service which is a small fortune. But if Lhota would have won the election it would have been no different. One would think that as a former MTA chairman he would have been more sympathetic to the MTA. But he also would not have increased the MTAs subsid because he was nothing more than an opportunistic politician. He capitalized by being in the right place at the right time and ran for mayor because the MTA already had hurricane procedures in place. He unashamedly took credit when he did nothing. His loyalty to the MTA ended the day he left. As mayor he would have new priorities and would have left the MTA to turn in the wind.
“If Lhota would have won the election it would have been no different.”
It has been no different for 20 years. The MTA has borrowed to cover this up, and now we either pay twice — for past and future capital plans — or the system declines just when younger generations are relying on it more. They have been robbed.
“Nothing more than an opportunistic politician.”
So are they all. They are careerists. What Ben is saying is you lose Cuomo, you get stuck handing out the sacrifices necessary as the result of the past and wrecking any hope of future offices. And what Cuomo and DeBlasio seem to be saying is “not me, someone else some time later, consequences be damned.”
I am glad you mentioned MTA innefficiencies. The MTA is grossly inefficient and every time they get more money there is less of an incentive for them to improve efficiciency. Of course they still should get more money, but they must not stop looking for more efficiencies. I think it was Walder who first admitted they weren’t as efficient as they could be. Prior to him they always insisted that they were doing everything right and merely denied a thing bad the media said of them. The MTA is very dysfunctional and inefficient and many abuses need correction.
I am also surprised with what Russianoff chose to highlight of the MTA does not get enough funding. The subways won’t stop running without countdown clocks. They will stop running if the MTA can’t replace all the signals that need replacement or adequately maintain its substations, you know the non-sexy things that the politicians and public don’t care about.
At least some of the inefficiencies stem from which depots bus routes are based from. Unfortunately, I don’t think that will be rectified anytime soon.
Moreover, I suspect that a great deal of the inflated cost of MTA contracts is more future robbing by Generation Greed. Here’s another story no one talks about.
Unionized public employees cut political deals to get their pensions retroactively increased in the 1990s. The cost was hidden and put off until later, and that’s killing us now and will get worse.
What about the construction unions? There were similar deals to increase the pensions of those who are now in Florida. And pension underfunding by construction executives, who thus showed higher profits, got more bonuses, cashed and headed for Florida too.
So the multi-employer pension funds for construction workers are underfunded. Put these private sector workers can’t force taxpayers to pay. Or can they?
The MTA is required to take the union deal. The private sector increasingly does not. The MTA is paying extra not only for the private construction pensions related to its own past projects, but also those in the private sector as well! That is what I suspect.
All this, I believe, is being swept under the rug. If everybody’s guilty, then nobody’s guilty.
So summing up:
1 — this writer has no idea what he’s talking about in terms of subway service, and in actuality, NYC subways have experienced transformative growth and positive change over the past 30 years
2 — nevertheless, capital improvements are still needed
3 — NYC subways/busses remain a fantastic bargain for getting around a huge and complex city
4 — the fare raise is really not that big of a deal considering Points 2 and 3
When you say “this writer” in point 1, are you referring to Ben as the author of this post or the author of The Post article Ben referenced? Because Ben knows what he’s talking about while the woman writing for The Post does not.
Otherwise, I agree with your four-point simplification to a certain degree.
Ha should have been more specific — the post writer doesn’t know what’s up
Hmmm, shocker.
In DC, declining service and rising costs led to lower subway ridership. I think NYC is about to hit that point.
When (if?) bike infrastructure finally becomes useable for the masses, and not just the bold and beautiful, then you’ll see a lot more people abandon the subway for short trips.
JJJ,
Comparing the MTA & WMATA is at best a folly & I think you know it. Metrorail is a subway that functions in ways similar to the commuter rail systems here in NYC. That’s not to say that Metrorail hasn’t in it’s own way been transformative nore am I suggesting that they aren’t in trouble right now, but you cant draw any conclusions about the MTA based on issues that are 250 miles away.
In DC it is much easier to run from transit despite the facts of the horrific traffic there as apposed to NYC where the MTA is a part of nearly everyones life even if they are riding bikes or driving everywhere. Speaking of bikes, there is no reason why bikes cant be a part of the total transit system rather than competing with it. That means that there needs to be facilities for them & I don’t mean just a few half assed lanes.
No – DC’s declining ridership had to do with economic retraction due to federal government retraction.
http://www.bizjournals.com/was.....years.html
$15 billion gap! Bloat! $35 billion capital plan! Spend! Debt! Rape! Service delays! Crime! Hipsters Hurr!
For a city with a $½-trillion+ economy, you’d think spending 3-5% or so of it to maintain and extend transit. The system really is teeming to the brim. Even at stupidly inflated prices it’s probably a win in the end.
And that first sentence is intentionally misleading, considering the amount the MTA wants to proportionally spend annually is much less than that.
“Even at stupidly inflated prices it’s probably a win in the end.”
At stupidly inflated prices, if one ignores the impact on air quality private automobiles may be cheaper, and those living in Houston and Dallas may end up better off.
Transit SHOULD BE cheaper. And not just because someone else is paying for it, whether today’s taxpayers or tomorrows via inflated debts. That RPA argument that the MTA should be paying contractors four times as much is NOT what I want to hear.
When I read that some journalist from the Post or the Daily News puts out a piece like this, to me the responces to it are pavlovian in nature & I ignore it. Stick out the red meat & watch the dogs salivate – facts be dammed. Unfortunately even the paper of record has been guilty of this as well for a while.
43,000 trains are late each month, a 36% increase from last year.
The trains are bad. Not 1980s bad, but bad.
This is where suboptimal operations, that would have worked on a less crowded system, begin to fall apart. MTA needs to actually get its act together, and quickly. There is less and less leeway for inefficiency.
-The IG found that less than 50% of G.O. time is spent productively. This needs to be fixed.
-Extensive interlining delays trains and lowers line capacity. This could be fixed, and relatively cheaply at that. Excessive dwell time also negatively impacts capacity.
-Capital work should not cost 10x what it does elsewhere, especially in this time when it is more imperative than ever. A solution to this problem needs to be found.
For interlining, it also depends on the situation. For the 5, it’s an easy fix in the Bronx and one basically requiring its own tracks in Brooklyn. Too bad the easy one may get blocked faster than the Brooklyn one. This kind of issue is actually not particularly prevalent in most of the subway system. It comes up, but only the 5 really has interlining as stupid as its own.
In general, it’s not only Rogers Jct (east of Franklin Av) that has interlining issues. Dekalb and 59th/CC are two other examples of junctions where interlining is preventing service from being increased.
About the 5, I remember we discussed a 3/5 swap, which would involve the installation of two switches. I don’t think we ever reached a conclusion on that, but anyway.
Dekalb could be de-interlined if the station were rebuilt, dropping the R one level and building a platform where it used to be. If the Japanese can do something similar in 4 hours, we can do it in a week.
59th/CC is the easiest to de-interline. The D would just go local down CPW, and the C express.
Which means people in the Bronx lose express service.
The 4 express is very close to almost every station on Concourse. Yes, there are drawbacks, but is this a commuter rail or a subway?
No it’s not.
By that logic, the 1 needs a West Side Express, Bay Ridge needs a Brooklyn express, and Pelham needs a Lex express. There are always tradeoffs between capacity and one-seat rides.
Yes, the compromise decided on is express and local service on the Concourse.
Sure, there can be a Bronx express. I never said there can’t be. What I’m saying is that all Concourse service would run local down CPW, just like all Pelham service runs local down Lex. Same thing.
after 80 years, almost everybody else thinks express service on the Concourse is a good idea.
I am not arguing against Bronx express service. I will again state my point: to increase CPW capacity and reduce delays, the D should be sent local on CPW, and the C express.
If you want to mindlessly shove as many trains through as possible. After 80 years many many people have arranged their lives around there being local and express service north of 145th Street on both branches of the line.
If people need quick service to Midtown so desperately that their lives depend on saving the three minutes on CPW, they can take the 4. And “mindless” has nothing to do with it; everyone knows ridership is growing, and since space on each train is finite the only answer is more trains. This cannot be done if routes are constantly merging and diverging.
Have you ever seen how crowded the 4 is???
The 4 doesn’t go to the West Side. And it’s quite a hike from the Concourse. Especially for people who live east of the Concourse.
How about all the people along Central Park West who have grown dependent on local service to 6th Avenue or 8th Avenue?
The CPW local takes 4 extra minutes along its entire length. If people really need express service, they can transfer at 125 St to the A/C expresses. Same for CPW – 8 Av riders: they can transfer at 59 St or 7/53. While yes there will be transfers, the increased frequencies will minimize the effect.
Example: passenger going from 72 St to 50/8. Currently, they will wait for the C, running every 9 minutes. 4.5min wait + 3min runtime = 7.5min.
Under the proposed plan, they will catch the B/D, waiting 1.5min, then transfer to the E at 7/53, waiting 2 min. The total travel time is 6 minutes, which gives 8.
Yes, 30 seconds more, but there will not be merging delays in Midtown. Also, this is a contrived example. Most people will be going to express stations on 8 Av, to which they will also be able to get the A/C.
Math correction: that would be 9 minutes, not 8. But still… the vast majority of 8 Av customers are served by the A/C, without the dogleg to 7/53.
Wasn’t silly of the city to go and build the 8th Ave. line. Everybody could just walk over from 6th. and the city can ban anyone not a healthy agile 20-something from living in the city, so that extra two block walk won’t be a problem for any of them.
What are you talking about? The worst thing that will happen is that people will have an extra walk across a platform. A PLATFORM!
Honestly, interlining only becomes a problem there if southbound B and D trains happen to reach 59 St-CC simultaneously (or if they approach 145 Street simultaneously when the B terminates there). Other than the particular scenario, there really aren’t any significant issues there. That one is also far more efficient as no trains have to cross over certain tracks just to reach certain other tracks (except short-turned B trains).
While I do believe problems at DeKalb Avenue could be mitigated through reconfiguration, the worst of the issues are north of the station. The issues are primarily near Myrtle Avenue, where Brighton trains are usually forced to wait for 4 Av-West End/Sea Beach trains.
In the Bronx, I’d still get behind the WPR express swap proposed years ago.
It happens pretty frequently that B and D trains arrive at the same time, and when the D train waits there is inevitably an A train or two waiting behind it. By the time those clear, the next D is delayed too. It piles up quickly. While it may work now, there is very little room for increased service.
By Dekalb Avenue, I included the junction north of there. The area is a disaster. The point of my proposed rebuild of Dekalb is that instead of doing the Atlantic passagewalk, passengers could transfer cross-platform between Brighton trains, which would run via 6 Av only, and 4 Av trains, which would run via Broadway only (or vice versa). It’s ridiculous that capacity is capped at 20tph because of people’s insistence of having a one-seat ride to everywhere.
I don’t remember which WPR express swap you mean, but I’m not sure how that would help. The whole point of de-interlining is that trains don’t have to wait for each other, and the 2/5 still have to merge eventually south of Jackson Av.
I see what you’re talking about, but I don’t quite see everything working as well as you may think. What you’re proposing involves creating another A/C situation while magnifying the N/Q situation. One of the things I mentioned back with that 3/5 swap was that it actually wouldn’t make sense to have services duplicate each other to such a large degree (the A/C situation is actually the exception rather than the norm). Suppose a person lived near the (Brighton) Kings Highway station and normally took the Q to Canal Street, as her workplace was near the complex. Now let’s say the job moved from Canal Street to near Herald Square. Suddenly, she has two very different options available and has a reduced chance of becoming stranded if something happens along either Broadway or 6 Av. Now suppose everything was permanently reconfigured so trains would be 4 Av-Broadway and 6 Av-Brighton only. She may not like that, especially if something happens on 6 Av which would decimate service between Brooklyn and Manhattan. Sure, she could find an alternative, but why would she want to? If she can get two very different one-seat rides going to and from the same places, she would much prefer that. After all, this variance allows for better coverage of weaknesses. The “same service” idea only somewhat works for the A and C, and is probably the least painful thing that can be done there.
Speaking of which, the C/D swap necessitates having the C switch to the express track for express service along one stretch only for the C to switch back to the local track afterward. Shifting the C to run express isn’t exactly an option north of Canal Street, especially considering how bad the E can get. Simply put, that’s not a logical move. Unless there is a problem which would necessitate such a move, that would create unnecessary confusion and delays.
It’s true that the 2 and 5 would have to merge south of Jackson Avenue, but the swap would involve the peak express service (yeah, it’ll do shit for non-peak service, but it’s something). This one would have the fewest consequences, as it would end the practice of having branching trains crossing in front of mainline trains in order to begin/end an express run. The only possible equivalent to this is a Bronx B/D swap. Even then, it wouldn’t really make sense, considering that the express service would soon become an inexplicably forced local in the peak direction.